MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394688839 · doi:10.1113/ep091682

Evaluation of interleukin‐1 and interleukin‐6 receptor antagonists in a murine model of acute lung injury

2024· article· en· W4394688839 on OpenAlexafffund
Émilie Meunier, Mélissa Aubin Vega, Damien Adam, Anik Privé, Mohammad Ali Mohammad Nezhady, Isabelle Lahaie, Christiane Quiniou, Sylvain Chemtob, Emmanuelle Brochiero

Bibliographic record

VenueExperimental Physiology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversité de Montréal
KeywordsARDSBleomycinMedicineTocilizumabLungInflammationDiffuse alveolar damageInterleukinCytokineImmune systemPharmacologyImmunologyInternal medicineAcute respiratory distressChemotherapyRheumatoid arthritis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The acute exudative phase of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), a severe form of respiratory failure, is characterized by alveolar damage, pulmonary oedema, and an exacerbated inflammatory response. There is no effective treatment for this condition, but based on the major contribution of inflammation, anti‐inflammatory strategies have been evaluated in animal models and clinical trials, with conflicting results. In COVID‐19 ARDS patients, interleukin (IL)‐1 and IL‐6 receptor antagonists (IL‐1Ra and IL‐6Ra, kineret and tocilizumab, respectively) have shown some efficacy. Moreover, we have previously developed novel peptides modulating IL‐1R and IL‐6R activity (rytvela and HSJ633, respectively) while preserving immune vigilance and cytoprotective pathways. We aimed to assess the efficacy of these novel IL‐1Ra and IL‐6Ra, compared to commercially available drugs (kineret, tocilizumab) during the exudative phase (day 7) of bleomycin‐induced acute lung injury (ALI) in mice. Our results first showed that none of the IL‐1Ra and IL‐6Ra compounds attenuated bleomycin‐induced weight loss and venous increase. Histological analyses and lung water content measurements also showed that these drugs did not improve lung injury scores or pulmonary oedema, after the bleomycin challenge. Finally, IL‐1Ra and IL‐6Ra failed to alleviate the inflammatory status of the mice, as indicated by cytokine levels and alveolar neutrophil infiltration. Altogether, these results indicate a lack of beneficial effects of IL‐1R and IL‐6R antagonists on key parameters of ALI in the bleomycin mouse model.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.449

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.336 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExperimental PhysiologySame topicRespiratory Support and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207